Anticholinergic drug burden tools/scales and adverse outcomes in different clinical settings: a systematic review of reviews

Background: Cumulative anticholinergic exposure (anticholinergic burden) has been linked to a number of adverse outcomes. To conduct research in this area, an agreed approach to describing anticholinergic burden is needed. Objective: This review set out to identify anticholinergic burden scales, to describe their rationale, the settings in which they have been used and the outcomes associated with them. Methods: A search was performed using the Healthcare Databases Advanced Search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane, CINAHL and PsycINFO from inception to October 2016 to identify systematic reviews describing anticholinergic burden scales or tools. Abstracts and titles were reviewed to determine eligibility for review with eligible articles read in full. The final selection of reviews was critically appraised using the ROBIS tool and pre-defined data were extracted; the primary data of interest were the anticholinergic burden scales or tools used. Results: Five reviews were identified for analysis containing a total of 62 original articles. Eighteen anticholinergic burden scales or tools were identified with variation in their derivation, content and how they quantified the anticholinergic activity of medications. The Drug Burden Index was the most commonly used scale or tool in community and database studies, while the Anticholinergic Risk Scale was used more frequently in care homes and hospital settings. The association between anticholinergic burden and clinical outcomes varied by index and study. Falls and hospitalisation were consistently found to be associated with anticholinergic burden. Mortality, delirium, physical function and cognition were not consistently associated. Conclusions: Anticholinergic burden scales vary in their rationale, use and association with outcomes. This review showed that the concept of anticholinergic burden has been variably defined and inconsistently described using a number of indices with different content and scoring. The association between adverse outcomes and anticholinergic burden varies between scores and has not been conclusively established

The results of a consecutive series of dynamic posterior stabilizations using the PercuDyn device

PURPOSE: To evaluate the results of a consecutive series of patients affected by lumbar discogenic pain associated with facet pain and canal stenosis surgically treated with the PercuDyn device. METHODS: From 2009, 129 consecutive patients (96 M, 33 F, mean age 62) were treated with posterior dynamic stabilization screws (PercuDyn). Inclusion criteria were minimum follow-up of 24 months; pain localized at the lumbar spine column alone or in association to lower limb radicular pain; magnetic resonance evidence of disc degeneration associated with facet degeneration and canal stenosis. Patients were clinically studied using VAS scale and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI); CT assessment of the neuroforamina and spinal canal areas was done at 1 month of follow-up. RESULTS: At 24 months of follow-up, 96 patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria. 96 intervertebral spaces were treated (85 levels L5-S1, 11 levels L4-L5). The VAS scale showed a statistically significant difference at 1 month, 6 months and 2 years with respect to the pre-operative value (p < 0.001). The ODI score registered a significant difference with the same fashion (p < 0.001 both at 1- and 6-month, and 2-year follow-up with respect to the pre-operatory). At 1-month follow-up, neuroforamina and spinal canal areas were considerably wider (p < 0.05). 70 (72.5 %) patients were satisfied of the procedure. CONCLUSIONS: In this wide cohort study, the PercuDyn ensured good clinical and radiological results, with more than 70 % of patients satisfied of the procedure. Very few complications were noted, with an immediate return to daily activities. At longer follow-ups, 10 % of patients received revision surgery